Literature DB >> 28454025

Review and analysis of strengths and weaknesses of agro-ecosystem models for simulating C and N fluxes.

Lorenzo Brilli1, Luca Bechini2, Marco Bindi3, Marco Carozzi4, Daniele Cavalli2, Richard Conant5, Cristopher D Dorich5, Luca Doro6, Fiona Ehrhardt7, Roberta Farina8, Roberto Ferrise3, Nuala Fitton9, Rosa Francaviglia8, Peter Grace10, Ileana Iocola11, Katja Klumpp12, Joël Léonard13, Raphaël Martin12, Raia Silvia Massad4, Sylvie Recous14, Giovanna Seddaiu11, Joanna Sharp15, Pete Smith9, Ward N Smith16, Jean-Francois Soussana7, Gianni Bellocchi12.   

Abstract

Biogeochemical simulation models are important tools for describing and quantifying the contribution of agricultural systems to C sequestration and GHG source/sink status. The abundance of simulation tools developed over recent decades, however, creates a difficulty because predictions from different models show large variability. Discrepancies between the conclusions of different modelling studies are often ascribed to differences in the physical and biogeochemical processes incorporated in equations of C and N cycles and their interactions. Here we review the literature to determine the state-of-the-art in modelling agricultural (crop and grassland) systems. In order to carry out this study, we selected the range of biogeochemical models used by the CN-MIP consortium of FACCE-JPI (http://www.faccejpi.com): APSIM, CERES-EGC, DayCent, DNDC, DSSAT, EPIC, PaSim, RothC and STICS. In our analysis, these models were assessed for the quality and comprehensiveness of underlying processes related to pedo-climatic conditions and management practices, but also with respect to time and space of application, and for their accuracy in multiple contexts. Overall, it emerged that there is a possible impact of ill-defined pedo-climatic conditions in the unsatisfactory performance of the models (46.2%), followed by limitations in the algorithms simulating the effects of management practices (33.1%). The multiplicity of scales in both time and space is a fundamental feature, which explains the remaining weaknesses (i.e. 20.7%). Innovative aspects have been identified for future development of C and N models. They include the explicit representation of soil microbial biomass to drive soil organic matter turnover, the effect of N shortage on SOM decomposition, the improvements related to the production and consumption of gases and an adequate simulations of gas transport in soil. On these bases, the assessment of trends and gaps in the modelling approaches currently employed to represent biogeochemical cycles in crop and grassland systems appears an essential step for future research.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biogeochemical models; C cycle; Management; N cycle; Pedo-climate

Year:  2017        PMID: 28454025     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.208

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  10 in total

1.  Estimating soil organic carbon changes in managed temperate moist grasslands with RothC.

Authors:  Asma Jebari; Jorge Álvaro-Fuentes; Guillermo Pardo; María Almagro; Agustin Del Prado
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 2.  Towards a multiscale crop modelling framework for climate change adaptation assessment.

Authors:  Bin Peng; Kaiyu Guan; Jinyun Tang; Elizabeth A Ainsworth; Senthold Asseng; Carl J Bernacchi; Mark Cooper; Evan H Delucia; Joshua W Elliott; Frank Ewert; Robert F Grant; David I Gustafson; Graeme L Hammer; Zhenong Jin; James W Jones; Hyungsuk Kimm; David M Lawrence; Yan Li; Danica L Lombardozzi; Amy Marshall-Colon; Carlos D Messina; Donald R Ort; James C Schnable; C Eduardo Vallejos; Alex Wu; Xinyou Yin; Wang Zhou
Journal:  Nat Plants       Date:  2020-04-15       Impact factor: 15.793

3.  A Vision for Incorporating Environmental Effects into Nitrogen Management Decision Support Tools for U.S. Maize Production.

Authors:  Kamaljit Banger; Mingwei Yuan; Junming Wang; Emerson D Nafziger; Cameron M Pittelkow
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2017-07-28       Impact factor: 5.753

Review 4.  Characterising the biophysical, economic and social impacts of soil carbon sequestration as a greenhouse gas removal technology.

Authors:  Alasdair J Sykes; Michael Macleod; Vera Eory; Robert M Rees; Florian Payen; Vasilis Myrgiotis; Mathew Williams; Saran Sohi; Jon Hillier; Dominic Moran; David A C Manning; Pietro Goglio; Michele Seghetta; Adrian Williams; Jim Harris; Marta Dondini; Jack Walton; Joanna House; Pete Smith
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2019-10-26       Impact factor: 10.863

5.  New Bidirectional Ammonia Flux Model in an Air Quality Model Coupled With an Agricultural Model.

Authors:  Jonathan E Pleim; Limei Ran; Wyat Appel; Mark W Shephard; Karen Cady-Pereira
Journal:  J Adv Model Earth Syst       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 6.660

6.  A protocol to build soil descriptions for APSIM simulations.

Authors:  Rogerio Cichota; Iris Vogeler; Joanna Sharp; Kirsten Verburg; Neil Huth; Dean Holzworth; Neal Dalgliesh; Val Snow
Journal:  MethodsX       Date:  2021-11-06

7.  How Modelers Model: the Overlooked Social and Human Dimensions in Model Intercomparison Studies.

Authors:  Fabrizio Albanito; David McBey; Matthew Harrison; Pete Smith; Fiona Ehrhardt; Arti Bhatia; Gianni Bellocchi; Lorenzo Brilli; Marco Carozzi; Karen Christie; Jordi Doltra; Christopher Dorich; Luca Doro; Peter Grace; Brian Grant; Joël Léonard; Mark Liebig; Cameron Ludemann; Raphael Martin; Elizabeth Meier; Rachelle Meyer; Massimiliano De Antoni Migliorati; Vasileios Myrgiotis; Sylvie Recous; Renáta Sándor; Val Snow; Jean-François Soussana; Ward N Smith; Nuala Fitton
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2022-09-02       Impact factor: 11.357

8.  An Integrated Agriculture, Atmosphere, and Hydrology Modeling System for Ecosystem Assessments.

Authors:  L Ran; Y Yuan; E Cooter; V Benson; D Yang; J Pleim; R Wang; J Williams
Journal:  J Adv Model Earth Syst       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 6.660

9.  Impact of two centuries of intensive agriculture on soil carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus cycling in the UK.

Authors:  Shibu E Muhammed; Kevin Coleman; Lianhai Wu; Victoria A Bell; Jessica A C Davies; John N Quinton; Edward J Carnell; Samuel J Tomlinson; Anthony J Dore; Ulrike Dragosits; Pamela S Naden; Margaret J Glendining; Edward Tipping; Andrew P Whitmore
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 7.963

Review 10.  A framework for modelling soil structure dynamics induced by biological activity.

Authors:  Katharina Meurer; Jennie Barron; Claire Chenu; Elsa Coucheney; Matthew Fielding; Paul Hallett; Anke M Herrmann; Thomas Keller; John Koestel; Mats Larsbo; Elisabet Lewan; Dani Or; David Parsons; Nargish Parvin; Astrid Taylor; Harry Vereecken; Nicholas Jarvis
Journal:  Glob Chang Biol       Date:  2020-08-23       Impact factor: 10.863

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.